From owner-freebsd-advocacy Tue Jan 30 23: 9:26 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Received: from pilchuck.reedmedia.net (pilchuck.reedmedia.net [63.145.197.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8313437B684 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:09:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from reed by pilchuck.reedmedia.net with local-esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 14NrO3-00058x-00; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:09:03 -0800 Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:09:02 -0800 (PST) From: "Jeremy C. Reed" To: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org Subject: Infoworld Unix reviews Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I read a short article in January 15's Infoworld ("Six flavors run the gamut: The good, the bad, and the ugly"). It didn't mention BSD, but quickly ranked a few "Unix" systems: Irix, AIX, Tru64, HPUX, UnixWare, and Solaris. I am curious about some of the statements and opinions -- and I am seeking some further comments in regards to comparing with the BSDs. For example, they tested 10 "corporate" applications and the systems scored between 0 out of 10 and 10 out of 10. These applications are: Oracle 8i database, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Adobe FrameMaker 6, iPlanet Enterprise Web Server, Microsoft Internet Explorer, Sybase ASE, Lotus Domino, ChiliSoft ASP, Vitria BusinessWare and SAP. Which of these applications run (non-native or native) under a BSD? Also, I am interested in opinions -- which of these applications are important and which don't matter? The review also mentioned "Standard" and they all were either Unix 95 or Unix 98. Does this matter to the BSDs? Or what does this mean to developers beginning with BSDs? How do the (non-official-Unix) BSD's compare in regards to these Unix 95/98 standards? Any examples? Some advantages and disadvantages listed included: - scales to 512 CPUs and 1TB of ram - 64-bit CPUs "are solid performers at deceptively low clock speeds" - ultra-fast server I/O subsystems - Linux source code portability - "inscrutable" manuals and support documents - "borrows pieces from several Unix implementations to create a versatile, broadly compatible operating environment" - "holes in System V compatibility make application porting difficult" Any thoughts in regards to BSDs? Basically, I am looking for ideas on how I can promote BSD using some of these examples. (I want to develop some strong arguments for BSD in comparison with "official" Unix's.) I just found the article online at http://www.infoworld.com/cgi-bin/fixup.pl?story=http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/01/15/010115tcunix.xml&dctag=operatingsystems Jeremy C. Reed http://www.reedmedia.net/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message